Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
STATION
MSNBCW 9
CSPAN 8
MSNBC 5
CNNW 4
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CSPAN2 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 44
Search Results 0 to 43 of about 44 (some duplicates have been removed)
budget surpluses in a row. for all of this talk about deficit reduction, making sure our books are balanced, this is the guy who did it three times. he helped oversee what our nation's finest universities and largest investment banks. in my administration, he has managed operations for the state department and the budget for the entire executive branch. i have sought his advice on virtually every decision i have made from economic policy to foreign policy. one reason he has been so effective in this town is because he is a low-key guy who prefers to surround himself with policy experts rather than television cameras. over the years, he has built a reputation as a master of policy can work with members of both parties and ford principled compromises. maybe most importantly, as the son of a polish immigrant, a man of deep and about face, he knows that every member on a page, every dollar we budget, every decision we make has to be an expression of who we wish to be as a nation, our values. values that say everybody gets a fair shot at opportunity. and says we expect all of us to
to the point of dealing with the biggest deficit this country faces the jobs deficit. and to me this bill simply put a band aid on the problem. it did do something the president wanted to do, committed to do. he delivered on the promise to try to help protect the middle class but my fear is that in these next 3 -- three political maneuvers we're going to see that people will start attacking the middle class and i believe that this was our best opportunity to really take care long term the issues that we need to address to a balanced approach. >> so to follow up, you voted early, i was watching the board. you voted early. you didn't vote to see if it was going to pass and then vote no. was the idea that obama kind of lost some leverage there that you wanted to see it fail because obama now has to go back to the debt ceiling and he doesn't have the benefit of tax cuts looming? >> i knew it was going to pass. after the republicans walked away from the negotiations and then tried to plan b by speaker republican speaker bane thear failed where republicans wouldn't support their own speaker it
or the largest economy in the world. we need to get to the point of dealing with the biggest deficit in the country, the jobs deficit. to me, this bill simply put a band-aid on the problem. it did do something the president wanted to do, committed to do. he delivered on the promise to try to help protect the middle- class class. my theory is that in the next three political maneuvers that we are going to see coming up in congress, that people will start attacking the middle class. i believe this was our best opportunity to really take care long-term of the issues that we need to address to a balanced approach. >> to follow-up on that, you you voted early. you are not just waiting to see if it was going to pass and then vote no. the idea that obama kind of thatsome leverage theire, you wanted to see him fail, that he has to go back to the leverage -- that he does not have the leverage -- >> after the republicans walked away from the negotiations and tried the plan b by speaker boehner, it became clear, even after they tried to amend the senate yield that they could not do so dosh and
to dominate his second. that is the nation's debt and deficit. we already reached the $16 trillion debt limit set by congress. treasury secretary tim geithner says his accounting tricks and maneuvers can only buy us a couple more months the president wants to call on congress to raise the debt ceiling without drama. he says even the threat, note to raise the debt ceiling could cause a down-tick in the nation's credit rating as it did in 2011. republicans are determined to use that leverage. it may be the only leverage they have to raise the nation's debt ceiling. in the past it has worked to demand spending cuts in exchange for raising the nation's debt ceiling. they intend to do it this time. heather? heather: a lot going on in washington. we hear rumors the president may address the issue of immigration reform. that may be one of the top priorities of his administration. is he expected to talk about that? >> reporter: perhaps but even before that the president is likely to be asked about efforts to curb the nation's gun violence with vice president biden set to give recommendations to the p
and health care reform was done. when we look at deficit reduction, it's four or five deals, each one in endless, horrible slog through the d.c. marshes. in the second term the two things we are going to see, it does not look like we are going to see much more on jobs. the white house is not fighting hard. they have not made infrastructure a condition of moving forward. we got $600 billion in the fiscal cliff. republicans are going to make a decision to include revenues or whether or not they are going to make a decision that is better to do no more reduction over the second term. if it is what it takes to keep the president from getting more tax revenues. >> let me ask this. what i hear you saying is deficit reduction. it seems as though we have a president who is legitimately a deficit hawk. he believes the deficit is a problem and deficit reduction is a priority. when you look at the approval rate of americans on handling of the economy, it's split half and half with support for the president and 49% versus 48% disapproving. there's a little room to do a big thing. this president i
class is shrinking our deficits in a balanced and responsible way. and for nearly two years now i've been fighting for such a plan, one that would reduce our deficits by $4 trillion over the next decade, which would stalize our debt and our deficit and n. a sustainable way for the next decade. that would be enough not only to stop the growth of our debt relative to the size of our economy but it would make it manageable so it doesn't crowd out the investments we need to make in people and education and job training and science and medical research, all the things that help us grow. step by step we've made progress towards that goal. over the past two years i've signed into law $1.4 trillion in spending cuts. two weeks ago i signed into law more than $600 billion in new revenue by making sure the wealthiest americans begin to pay their fair share. when you add the money that will save an interest payments on the debt, all together that adds up to a total of about $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction over the past two years. not counting the $400 million already saved from winding dow
to see him as the paragon of responsible spending. >> we'll start with the deficit, shrinking more rapidly than at any time since the end of the korean war. in the end of december, we had a deficit for the month of $260 million, not $260 billion, $260 million. which in washington is almost the budget. that's the smallest monthly deficit in five years. some of that is artificial. people pulling transactions forward because they were afraid of higher tax rates in 2013. but for the first three months of 2013, we have a rapidly shrinking fiscal 2013, we have a rapidly shrinking deficit. so we are in a way chasing a vanishing problem. >> which is interesting, and that would allow for some things that are dirty and things that are not so dirty, would completely perhaps get rid of this problem after a while. do you think we're headed for a full stalemate? >> it's such a shame. i think david is right because we have low debt service right now. we're paying less interest on our debt than we had in the reagan and bush administrations before because interest rates are so low. >> but they're g
or the highway either. we have a huge spending deficit problem. they were considering for well over a week the notion of just mint inging a trillion dollar c and calling it good. the federal reserve said that's phony. that doesn't work. and the treasury department on saturday said okay, you are right. we won't go that route. we need serious proposals from the president and it is not just the congress. it is -- we got to work together to solve the country's problems. >> let me -- let me split off debt limit here. are you willing to do the debt limit on its own without any -- president say he's not going to negotiate, are you willing to pass a clean debt limit? >> you know, i think passing a clean debt limit is problematic for the american people as well as for the congress and the country. i think that we should find common ground here to look at spending reforms for the long term to gettous a path to reducing debt and deficit. i think we should look at current spending reductions that could take place and in ways we can grow the economy. i would like to see us work together on this matter
in that time to clear the way for negotiations on long-term deficit reduction, to add muscle to the efforts to bring democrats to the table, they would include a provision in the debt ceiling legislation saying that lawmakers will not be paid if they do not pass a budget blueprint. was it right to step back from challenging the president over raising the debt ceiling? >> well, i think the house proposal is a step in the right direction. no doubt the senate hasn't done it's job. it's been nearly four years since it's passed a budget. but it doesn't go nearly far enough. we have a crisis. i just got back last week from afghanistan. and i had multiple servicemen and women clasp me on the arm and say, please do something about the debt and deficit. we're bankrupting the country. that's what the american people are looking for. and to date, politicians have both parties have been unwilling to take even a tiny step in the right direction. we've got to fix the problem. >> the senate has to pass a budget. do you believe that? >> i do. >> why has it been four years since you've done that? >> well, l
it doesn't add to our national debt and deficit when we are going to be at $20 trillion by 2016. jack lew has a lot to answer for but if every democrat votes for him, he needs five republicans to vote for him. senator sessions is a measured guy. when he makes a comment like this, i really think the senate should pay attention. >> arthel: we're going to go a little bit down the list. john brennan who is the choice leader. c.i.a. lindsay graham saying they shouldn't confirm until the administrationlab rates the attacks in benghazi. how do you see this playing out? >> i think john brennan is going to have the easiest time getting his nomination through. there will be a the couple tough questions from benghazi and also talking about enhanced interrogation procedures. ultimately those are things that happened under the bush administration. we don't torture anymore. i believe brennan is going to have a significantly and i think at the end of the day the nominations are going to saim through. >> arthel: go ahead. >> i love it when progressives against bush on drones and git more and everything e
politicians and the commanders on the ground are creating a large deficit of trust. after "rolling stone" interview in which mcchrystal slammed obama and members of the administration, he was forced to resign. he said he did not end as he would have wished. today he says he has moved on with his life and is now free to speak his mind. >> afghanistan is hard. it's always been hard. if you study their history, it's never anything but complex and difficult. >> i spent a career carrying typically an m-16 and later an m-4 carbine. i personally don't think there is any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets, and particularly in and around the schools in america. i like the fact that chuck hagel has had his feet in the mud as a soldier. i like the fact that he's had a lot of background. >> joining me now is the former top commander in afghanistan, retired general stanley mcchrystal. he has a brand-new memoir called "my share of the task." general, nice to see you. >> good to see you, chuck. >> we have heard you on a number of topics. it was interesting on the assault weapon. i want to st
, the deficit, gun control, immigration. what should the president do first to show republicans he's not looking for revenge or looking to pick fights? >> i would say the budget. to make an honest attempt on both sides to try to reduce spending or reduce the growth in spending. that to me is the one place where there is enough on the table that both sides can make progress if they want to. you get into gun control, i basically support the president's program, but he's not going to get very much support at all among republicans for that. that's a good political point for him, but i don't see it going anywhere. as far as the illegal immigration or making it legal or whatever, reform, i would say there's an opportunity, people like marco rubio, for instance, and others, and also you have the chamber of commerce, you have some republican vested interest. i would say the budget and immigration are the two areas, spending and immigration. >> can he get through some simple things on gun control, if not a ban on assault weapons. that might be impossible with republican caucus, but universal background c
, the nation we need to rebuild is our own. we have to grow our economy and shrink our deficits. we have to create new jobs and boost family incomes. we have to fix our infrastructure and our immigration system. we have to protect our planet from the destructive effects of climate change. we need to protect our children from the horrors of gun violence. host: the president in his weekly address, touching on some of the things that will come up in his state of the union address, scheduled for next february. this point and our twitter page -- from "the new york times sunday magazine, an interview with president shimon peres of israel. let me share with you when -- one wuote -- in the end, if nothing works, the president will use military power against iran. i am sure of it. that is an interview with shimon peres, the discussion of u.s.- israeli relations and the situation in iran. that is available online as well. let's go back to your calls on the issue of congress being bypassed to raise the debt limit. the hill newspaper, a letter written by senate democrats -- they sent a letter to the
-or-no. >> no risk. >> the debt ceiling was raised in august the political fight in the spot lighted on the deficit and debt problems less s&p to downgrade the u.s. credit rating for the first time in history. >> geithner steered the major economic moves in the first term and now he is stepping down. president obama's pick to replace him is jack lew, who has established a close relationship with the president. lew is not is chummy with republicans on the hill after the debt ceiling negotiation back in 2011. for that reason and others, his confirmation hearing could be bumpy. if confirmed, he will be dealing with the top issue in this second term, how to get the economy moving and addressing the country's long term fiscal problems. >> this is a president that is forced to grapple with the budget woes, with the economy that cannot get over the hump. it will consume most of his time, i believe, in the second term. >> what he cannot do going into the term is go from economic crisis to economic crisis. that is not leadership. he has to figure out how to address this in ay way. our health care reform can
the government running. it will be planned to slowly but surely, what our nation out of debt, deficit, and declined garrett on your behalf, we will insist the democrats who run the rest of washington to the same. this debate is often argued in numbers and figures but it is really about and families like yours that bear the burden of a slow economy. constant uncertainty and. ever-changing government rules chase our jobs and opportunities overseas. when day to day life costs more and jobs pay less, we do not solve the problem by delaying our cattle decision -- spending decisions, raising taxes, or refusing to answer the most pressing economic challenges. with the swearing in of a new congress and the inauguration of president obama, this is an opportunity for a fresh start. government debt affects all of us. republicans will not to to provide a blank check for uncontrolled spending and constant nickel and dime tax increases. we should gut washington's budget, your budget. these are the challenges of our times. we have the guidance of great leaders in the past who have faced tougher chal
the things that really matter like how the deficit's been destroying the country since january 21, 2009. how zor owes is a hungarian term for class traitor and
in the late 1980's when we didn't have to talk about how to pay for disaster assistance because the deficit was only $3 trillion. but we've so badly mismanaged our money after that, by the time we got to hurricane katrina in 2005, that we actually did start talking about offsetting and paying for disaster relief and paid for and offset about 40% of it. but we didn't learn. we didn't learn from those mistakes and we've continued to mismanage our money and to run up our deficit to such a point now where we're at $16 trillion today and it's incumbent upon us to have the discussion about whether or not we have the money to do this. and whether or not it's important enough to us to pay for it. i wish very much that we weren't here today. i wish very much that we could pass this and easily borrow the money, without any questions whatsoever. but we've wasted that opportunity. we've mismanaged our own finances to the point where we are now no longer capable of taking care of our own. think about that for a second. in the united states of america we do not have enough money to take care of our own c
. by creating jobs we reduce the deficit. >> jennifer: i'm take taking it as an encouraging sign that the tea party can be moved by public voices. if they can be moved on the debt ceiling of all things, maybe they could be moved on guns. you wrote in the "huffington post," advocating reducing defense spending so you can spend more money and invest in the united states. the question is in the negotiations in congress over the spending do you see that happening? >> we've got to make it happen. again, it's got to be the voice of the american people that will make it happen. people don't realize that 60% of our discretionary money go to the defense. wewe need and want a strong defense, with you but quite frankly out dateed cold war-era weapons can be taken off the table. there are many, many ways we can save money with defense in our pentagon budget, and never even touch anything that would affect our troops and their benefits and their families or national defense. nothing is off of the table and we have to under that defense can't be off of the table. we have to keep defense on the table as par
was raised in august, the political fight and the spotlight on the count row's deficit and debt problems led s&p to downgrade the u.s. credit rating for the first time in history. >> geithner steered the major economic moves in the first term, now he's stepping down at treasury. the pick to replace him is jack lew, who has established a close relationship with the president. he is know chummy with the republicans on the hill after the debt ceiling negotiation. for that reason and other, his looming confirmation hearing could be bumpy. but if confirmed, lew will likely be dealing with the top issue in this second term, how to get the economy moving and addressing the count re's long-term fiscal problems. >> this is a president that is forced to grapple to the tenor of our times with the budget woes, with the economy that can't get over the hump. it's going to consume most of his time, i believe, in the second term. >> what he cannot do, going into this term is go from economic crisis to economic crisis. that's not leadership. what he will have to do is figure out how we address this in a broa
a deficit and debt point of view. so there's much more resistance on the republican side than there used to be. to all of the little riders and pieces of pork that are loaded into these disaster relief bills. and that's some of the changes we've seen in terms of these things being held up. an easy way to do this, and it's hard to get an agreement on this in the senate-s just to pass a clean disaster relief bill with nobody else's projects in there. having said that, republicans need to be careful. there are a number of republican house seats in new jersey and new york that could be threatened if republicans are perceived as holding up aid to sandy. and it's just not anywhere they really want to be when they're trying to focus on a debt ceiling fight or at least they should be. and i think from a political point of view and even substantively they have much bigger -- they have much bigger things to go after and try and accomplish than being perceived as callous when you have so many people in the northeast that don't have functional homes in the dead of winter. >> quickly changing topics,
our debt to g.d.p., our deficit to g.d.p. down around 3%, which is the basis of all economists left, right and center all agree on the areas we can begin to grow as a country. and as my grandfather used to say with grace of god and goodwill of the neighbors, cooler heads will prevail now between now and the time we deal with the debt ceiling and we may meet the goal which we set out to do, which is to have roughly a $4 trillion cut over 10 years in the long-term deficit and to put us on that path. but i didn't come here to talk about any of those important subjects today, because as important as they all are today we have a more urgent and immediate call and that is how to deal with the epidemic of gun violence in america. you all know the statistics better than anyone so i'm not going to repeat them. on that score, i owe an incredible debt of gratitude to you at the head table and those of you in the room. i know we don't have unanimity in this ballroom nor do we in any ballroom, but we all acknowledge that we have to do something. we have to act. and i hope we all agree, there is
change, balanced deficit reduction, reducing gun violence and the implementation of the affordable care act. with me now, jim messina, the man responsible for re-electing the president and heading this new non-profit group and he's head of the inaugural parade. this is a busy time for you jim, huh? >> hi, craig, how are you? it's busy, but a lot of fun. >> let's start with this new group here. it's set up like a 501 -- it's set up as a 501c4 group which is different from a super pac. it's able to legally coordinate with the white house. how do you think that's going to help the mission? >> look. we went out and surveyed our members across the country and two things became very apparent. one, they wanted to stay together. they had built something very special through two very tough presidential campaigns and two, they wanted to continue to work on the issues that motivated them to get involved with barack obama in the first place. you talked about them, the economy. immigration reform, climate change. all things that we care very deeply about and so as we looked at how to do that, the st
form deliberate of an overhang lie the u.s. there is an issue with respect to fiscal deficit. where we saw the debt ceiling. so if that were to get into any kind of a logjam, not getting results, there can be some amount of sentiment that can impact us. and impact the customers and, therefore, to us. similarly in india, you look, the budget is going to come up in february. worry seeing further moderation in interest rates. but we still do not know, because quarter four tends to be a very good quarter. we have concern because we have very good revenue comes from india gee of fee. but some of those moves that will happen by the government and therefore the decision for investment and therefore there is a little bit of uncertainty. that is a big reason why we have given a guidance of .5% to 3% in large range. >> suresh -- >> based on the deal plan that we have, we feel that -- what? >> so just to be clear, you're basically saying just so people know what we're talking about, the guide kwans for the current quarter was between 1.2% and 3.5%. you came in at 2.4% revenue growth. your guidanc
that number is. it's more than a trillion. we are working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it. second, the administration does not support blowing up planets. third, why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars that could be exploited by a one-man starship. if you pursue a career in a math relead field, the force will be us. the death star's power to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the force. bravo to the white house for putting that out. it's filled well inside references to star wars movies. we tweeted a link where you can read the whole thing. blue rapid says it's $850 quadrillion by the way. now you know how fast it would cost. >> somebody studied how much it would cost. they have hot links throughout the article. >> it's amazing. >> it's a great piece. >>@bp show on twitter. >> all right. >> death star. >> we have a death star. we have no trillion dollar coin. all of the fun stuff. over the weekend. >> franklin mint. >> this is "the bill press show." going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that
debate. i'll be very concrete. other such on the whole reason we have large budget deficits is because the economy collapse. and in classic washington fashion, this is the case with the schoolhouse is on fire and rather than focusing on putting the fire out, everyone in washington runs out to use as much water. the budget deficit is the economy right now. that's the to 50 minute like that but that's the truth. i think it would be great if an organization with strength and integrity of a or b. would stand up and make the point because we're having an entire budget that is basically premised on something that is not true. >> i agree with you. we do have underlying pieces of our economy that need to get fixed. but massive change in spending and we've already cut a trillion dollars over all in spending. we've cut medicare as part of the political their act. we have to be really careful and just solving these problems by cutting spending. .. >> we do it in a way that supports families and the population that we have. >> let me just add to that. i agree with you, but unfortunately, most of t
. that california is nowhere near balancing the budget. they have had multibillion-dollar deficits in the past. what i like to do, some of my friends who don't believe taxes matter including the guy in the white house, i say if you don't think taxes matter and affect behavior, explain to me, bill, why it is there has been about 500,000 new jobs over the last 10 years created in texas with no income tax and where california lost about 500,000 jobs? there is lot of factors but i think taxes are one of them. bill: 13% for california. if that is the case they leapfrogged hawaii. matt, give you the last point. if bobby jindal gets his way do folks in louisiana have a better chance at tracking jobs? >> absolutely yes. look at call to, what jerry brown is doing is short-term fix. bringing money by increasing taxes but the long-term effect jobs will leave, people will leave and hurt the economy long term. bill: matt, thank you. steve moore, thank you as well. e-mail is hemmer@foxnews.com. viewers on home on twitter that follow me, @billhemmer, file your one word, not one word, one line. martha: one word is
the deficit, let your member of congress know. if you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message. america, after all, has always been a grand experiment in compromise. >> one thing i will not compromise over is whether or not congress should pay the tab for a bill they already racked up. if congress refuses to give the united states the ability to pay its bills on time, the consequences for the entire global economy could be catastrophic. the last time they threatened this course of action our entire economy suffered for it. >> all right. the trajectory of the perspective of compromise. >> that's entertaining but i think a i have a little bit of minority opinion. some of it is a bit overstated. in you're preamble setting this up. to assume that when the president was delivering that speech in 2009, that he did not understand just how difficult the road ahead would be and just how much recess substance he would get from the other party. i think, understates the sophistication that this man has about politics and he knew what the moment was in 2009. i think that
. the problem is if you'd inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put out a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to get out of that, and it is difficult for or organizations to think about releasing the information before it is out for. -- asked for. i have been involved in several situations where the information was available and understandable. it mitigated some concerns. it was difficult to make that transparent, and catching up with that is really difficult. one reason for the impact was the lack of information as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. as a context for moving beyond the research done, what do you think the larger research agenda ought to be about? >> the hydrocarbons in the continental shelf and inland areas are pretty well known. it is the deep sea we did not have information for. i think the deep sea ecosystem is an area we need to emphasize, and some of the longer living organisms such as marine mammals. one of the issues is the effect of multiple stressors. we have some smart jury is that were heavily oiled, and s
if there is a number. working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it. number two, the administration does not support blowing up planets. number three, why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a death star with a fundamental flaw exploited by a one-man starship. thank you for making the point about the starship. [ applause ] >> stephanie: hard-of-hearing darth vader never gets old. >> go to the stephanie miller time line on facebook and you'll see it. scroll down. >> stephanie: what? dan in missouri, you're on "the stephanie miller show." hi dan. >> caller: hi, stephanie. i'm a ron paul libertarian straight guy and i love your show. you touched slightly on what i wanted to ask you about but not exactly. i'm asking you personally, would you acknowledge that in a year's time there are people who are attacked by bad guys, they happen to have a gun on them, wherever that may be and that the bad guy just backs off because he's a chicken doesn't get shot and that no-no shots are fired, no one's hurt. no reports are filed. and that that actually saves -- studies on this exact thing would
Search Results 0 to 43 of about 44 (some duplicates have been removed)